Therapy and material choices in pulp exposure among public dentists in Norway

This study aimed to investigate the following: (1) the preferences of public dentists for procedures and materials in carious or non-carious pulp exposure of permanent teeth; (2) how factors such as clinical experience, scientific literature reading, and material availability affect their choices; (3) the self-assessed risk of root canal treatment after pulp capping.

An online questionnaire consisting of 20 multiple choice and open-ended questions was e-mailed to Norwegian public dental clinics. It assessed dentists' material preferences for direct pulp capping for carious or non-carious exposures, alongside factors such as years since graduation, scientific literature engagement, availability of materials, and clinical scenario choices. Respondents were also asked to estimate and reason long-term outcomes of their chosen materials. Standardized case descriptions ensured shared clinical understanding. Data were statistically analyzed and p-values ≤ 0.05 were considered statistically significant.

A total of 218 (23.9%) dentists responded. Direct pulp capping was preferred by 65% of respondents, with chemically curing materials - primarily calcium hydroxide - being most used. Chi-square analyses showed that dentists with fewer years of experience and those who had read scientific literature were more likely to prefer calcium silicate materials; however, these variables were not statistically significant predictors in the logistic regression models. Material availability was the strongest predictor of preference, with significantly increased odds of selecting calcium silicates or light-curing materials when available. 'Satisfied with clinical results for the chosen material' was the most frequently reported reason for material selection.

Most respondents in this study preferred calcium hydroxide for direct pulp capping in permanent teeth with closed apices, despite the superior clinical outcomes of hydraulic calcium silicates. Material availability in the clinic was the primary factor influencing dentists' choices, surpassing clinical experience and scientific literature engagement.